Baseball Toaster was unplugged on February 4, 2009.
They've been doing this for years . . . friggin' Red Sox. If the Rays stagger like zombies through tonight's game, which they likely will, it'll be like 2004 all over again, except in a dome and on artificial turf. Awful. My preview of Game 7 is up on SI.com.
I'm all for swapping Teixerira at 20 million for Giambi at same price. As long as we don't expect Teix to be MVP good, which you used to be able to expect for that money. He DOES bring excellent D, which is an asset.
On the mound ... CC and only CC, though I admit to watching Sveum try to destroy him down the stretch and worrying. (If we can't have him, the Brewers decided, NO ONE will!) Was it SIX starts in a row on 3 days rest for a rent-a pitcher? I can imagine the conversations between CC's agents and the Brewer manager.
Sabathia, Wang, Joba ... that'll do me for the top of the rotation just fine. I'd take Mussina back for sure, and let the team braintrust evaluate the truth of Pettitte's explanation for wearing down late (he didn't work out as much as usual) to make that call. I think he's okay at the back end as a 2nd lefty. Hughes? Cross fingers, remember how passionate so many people were about him 12 months ago? A year is a long time. Is IPK even on the radar?
In short, I just want the two premium free agent blends there. And I'd be looking hard for a CF in a trade - though the pickings are slim and I don't call Sarge Jr pickings. I don't much want Pudge, but we may need to do it, if Jorge's about to be a weird DH/1stbase/maybe catcher dude.
1 it looks like Pudge somehow slipped into Type A status. there's no reason to bring him back. he 'earned' $13 mil this year, so he'd be real pricey if he accepted arb. plus, he's gonna wanna start and we're already on the books for $2 mil next year w/ "name that Molina". cashman said no side deals have been discussed - thus far? - but it would be cool to offer I-Rod arb, have him decline, and us get yet 2 more draft picks. cashman needs to be super smart this offseason. if he plays his cards right, we can get some real good draft picks...
i hope moose comes back, i really do! pettitte seems to be a lock for a year. i hope he takes a paycut. he should do. i'm down with CC and Tex, as well...
i don't see how in the hell Tampa can win tonight, but... GO RAYS!!!
spun Andrew Hill Judgement! today. holy shit, what a great record!!!
Then I added that if it goes to game #7, I would bet the house on the Sox. Well, I'm not for being homeless, especially with winter coming (even though it'll be a crappy Christmas), but since it's before the first pitch, I'm changing my bet to the Rays.
Lester was "so-so" in game #3. And these are STILL the young, resilient, speedy, go-go Rays of 2008. I see the Rays taking an early 2-0 lead and holding on, eventually winning 5-4.
You read it here first ...
And how about them G-men. Sucks not being able to watch the game, but anytime Dallas loses it's a good day.
3 Joe Maddon got cute after Game 4 and tried to protect against the loss instead of going for the kill. The stats supported his move, but in subsequent moves Maddon panicked and overmananged. I still have faith the Rays will win despite Maddon and the rejuved Dud Sox. Go Garza!
5 Homelessness is not fun. Nevertheless, if you were a betting man I would recommend some safe motels to camp out in should this game go the way we otherwise hope. That would make Christmas a little better >;)
We think it's bad that Gammons extols the RS model of team-building on a regular basis, but we're going to be seeing even more of this from writers everywhere as they keep finding ways to win. They're the model franchise and it's not going to change anytime soon.
We may not catch up until 2011, if that.
The current red Sox "dynasty" is not even a dynasty. When they win three in a row and four out of five, then we can talk.
Until then, I am not worried about a consistent second place team as the model franchise.
The 1996-2001 Yankees were one of the four or five greatest dynasties in the history of the game. The 2004 and 2007 Red Sox are about as historic as, say, the 1964/1967 Cardinals.
If they win this year AND next year, they might be as impressive as the mid-60s Dodgers or, better, the 70s A's. Their repeated wild card march to the series has a few years to go before it can match the real dynasties in the game's long history.
Let's talk baseball.
15 my morning is equally ruined when I get endless emails from the Democrats Abroad group..today just happened to be Rush, along with 3 from Amazon and two from sources I cannot mention on a family blog..point being: not working spam blocker plus Sox victory = bad morning. not sure how that qualifies as "political commentary"..
as to baseball, what do the Rays have to do to get to Lester?
Ahhh...a nice lead-off hit. That's a start.
Anyway, sorry--I probably overreacted.
Really, the Red Sox were not that good this year, at least when you look at the numbers. Very good, yes, but not some sort of juggernaut.
The Phils match up with them in terms of run differential (only about 20 or 30 run difference). But still, my gut...
Say hey, Willie, A lead off double for Aybar.
I have no faith that they can hold 2-1 lead. But I do think that if they can keep Gritty and Papi from doing damage in this inning, they have a crack at some more runs in the bottom of the 6th. Gotta get to Lester in the 6th, because the Sox BP is stacked tonight.
just gettin' in from work. eating dinner. i'll catch up on the comments and the game soon...
GO RAYS!!!
go-go-garza!!!
That said, I can't say that I am unhappy with the result.
score more runs now. thank you, please!
40 you mean all the daydreams about having a musicians lifestyle are not true?? :)
but, no, i'm not your typical professional musician or drummer or anything like that. i'm just a boring baseball geek... : )
GO RAYS!!!
And right on cue...
i guess it might not be so bad with the extra run and the bottom of the order up. not sure i want him to face dusty again though. even with 2 outs.
oh no. the sure-handed bartlett. that sucks. what happened there? boo!!!
Go for the gusto here...bring in the closer. Actually, is the Rays closer any good? I don't even know who it is.
74 i hope you're not prescient!
Bad play by Crisp.
Does Tito PR for Ortiz?
get the gross lumberjack out. thank you, please!
So, what torturous way can Pedroia and Ortiz end up batting next inning?
Let's go Rays, steal one more here of (I assume) Papelbon.
That was nasty.
It be a damn shame if he held up. : )
Now, "closer by committee" is another story.
I just wanted to share that.
shit, i've gotta get down to the laundry room. not sure if i should go or wait...
(live chat over at The Griddle too fyi)
still, should be 2 outs already. how bout a sweet little DP right about now...
props to Maddon for sticking with Price here.
ground out to second
RAYS WIN!!! RAYS WIN!!! RAYS WIN!!!
Go back home to Boston you shlubs.
(Ok, I admit I'm a hater.)
dusty can shave now...
no more Red Sox Nation this year, BOO-YahH!!!
Good for the Rays.
Winters up here are already tough enough.
upton's gonna get the lcs mvp...right?!
I love drummer talk.
1. The 1922-1962 Yankees (20 championships in 41 years);
2. The Montreal Canadians from 1952-1978 (16 titles in 27 years);
3. The 1957 to 1986 Celtics (with 16 titles in 30 years); and
4. The 1964 to 1975 UCLA Bruins (with 10 titles in 12 yeas).
I am sure that there are other sports that can be added, but these are the ones I see.
The common thread to me is that a particular team wins roughly half the time over a long stretch or has at least 10 titles over a stretch. I don't consider the 1996-2000 Yankees to be a "dynasty" under that definition (nor the Bulls with 6 titles inside a decade) and I sure as hell don't consider any sox team to have ever been a dynasty.
146 stick 'em anyway ya can! ; )
rap "music"? ugh, that's a paradox, an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms. : /
In any case, by whatever reasonable criteria one uses, the current Sox "run" is nowhere near a dynasty, no matter how much some people throw the term around.
can't wait to watch this game tonight on replay!!
I realize that in sports we're using the term euphemistically but I still think it should be a bit longer than one decade.
Rays in 7, a classic WS that ends with B.J.Upton laying down a suicide squeeze off of Brad Lidge..
Living in Boston, though, I've seen at least two columnists talk about a budding Red Sox "dynasty", and make similar hyperbolic references to Papelbon as "approaching" Mo's playoff success as a big game pitcher. So I may never have believed the dynasty talk, but I was parroting the mood of RS optimists prior to this game.
Oh man, I am so happy for the Rays right now. Thursday sucked on so many levels, but the Rays proved they could perform the way they had all year when they were up against the wall.
right now, i'm on a big Blue Note kick. framing album covers around my place and putting up pictures from the blue note album covers book around my studio. of course, buying and listening to the cd's, too! i just typed out a list of BN cd's i have to email to you...at some point.
I tend to look at five to ten year periods, but expect greater dominance over that short period. 1996-2001 Yankees were definitely a dynasty in my book, as were the the early seventies A's (for that matter). I would subdivide your 1920s-1960s Yankees dynasty into a number of shorter dynasties.
Anyway, to each his own.
As far as dynasties go, I think all the points made have been good ones. The term does tend to get thrown about a bit too loosely these days, but Yankee/Canadien/UCLA level dominance in this day and age just isn't realistic given the nature of competition.
Told you so, Sox fans. HA!
Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.